Professional Documents
Culture Documents
TITLE
by
Author
Doctor of Philosophy
Date
Title ii
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Title v
LIST OF TABLES
Title vi
Evaluator Background
Stakeholders
Evaluand
What does the literature associated with the evaluand say are the key issues?
Key Issue 1
Key Issue 2
Key Issue 3
Criteria 1
Criteria 2
Criteria 3
Etc.
Standard 1
Standard 2
Standard 3
Etc.
Evaluation Questions
What questions do stakeholders need or want to answer regarding how well the
evaluand meets the criteria?
Based on the previous points, what evaluation questions should be asked?
Based on a rating or ranking of all possible questions raised, which are the highest
priority?
Which questions will this study address and why?
Question 1
Question 2
Question 3
Etc.
What processes and activities will be used to collect data to answer the questions
and compare the evaluand to the criteria?
How will each collection procedure be refined to ensure validity, reliability,
credibility, trustworthiness, generalizability, transferability, or whatever other methods
standards apply?
How will qualitative data be summarized and interpreted?
How will quantitative data be summarized and interpreted?
For each evaluation question, answer in paragraphs the details summarized in
Table 1.
Title ix
Reporting to Stakeholders
Required Resources
Chapter 4: Findings
What are the results or answers to the evaluation questions? In the report, present data
and answers in the sections below. In the proposal, answer these questions since you
can’t present results yet.
How will results be organized?
What displays of results do you anticipate using and why?
Can you anticipate any results already?
Etc.
What recommendations does this study yield? In the report, recommendations in the
sections below. In the proposal, answer these questions since you can’t present
recommendations yet.
Where will recommendations come from?
Will you be qualified to make recommendations and why?
Can you anticipate any kinds of recommendations already?
Recommendation 1
Recommendation 2
Recommendation 3
Etc.
Title xi
Limitations
Conclusions
Chapter 6: Meta-evaluation
How did this study hold up against each of the 30 meta-evaluation standards or Guiding
Principles (and others if appropriate)?
This section will contain your meta-evaluation or critique, which, together with the report
in chapters 1-5, constitutes your comprehensive exam for the doctoral degree. You may
find it helpful to use the checklist from Stufflebeam and answer each of 10 questions for
each of the 30 standards at
http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/program_metaeval_10point.htm .
But whether you do that or not, in this section explain why you met or did not meet each
standard; or explain why some standards were not relevant, if you feel that is the case.
The standards are listed below. You may fill in your responses there and/or do so in an
attachment using the checklist linked above as a framework for your critique.
Complete the additional questions that follow the standards regarding your overall
critique and comparisons to proposed versus actual schedule and budget.
Title xii
Utility Standards
The utility standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will serve the information
address pertinent questions about the program and be responsive to the needs and
the findings should be carefully described, so that the bases for value judgments are
clear.
U5 Report Clarity Evaluation reports should clearly describe the program being
evaluated, including its context, and the purposes, procedures, and findings of the
timely fashion.
Title xiii
Feasibility Standards
The feasibility standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will be realistic,
F2 Political Viability The evaluation should be planned and conducted with anticipation
of the different positions of various interest groups, so that their cooperation may
counteracted.
Propriety Standards
The propriety standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will be conducted
legally, ethically, and with due regard for the welfare of those involved in the
and effectively serve the needs of the full range of targeted participants.
done, how, by whom, when) should be agreed to in writing, so that these parties are
P4 Human Interactions Evaluators should respect human dignity and worth in their
P5 Complete and Fair Assessment The evaluation should be complete and fair in its
evaluated, so that strengths can be built upon and problem areas addressed.
P6 Disclosure of Findings The formal parties to an evaluation should ensure that the full
set of evaluation findings along with pertinent limitations are made accessible to
the persons affected by the evaluation and any others with expressed legal rights to
P7 Conflict of Interest Conflict of interest should be dealt with openly and honestly, so
Accuracy Standards
The accuracy standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will reveal and convey
technically adequate information about the features that determine worth or merit
A2 Context Analysis The context in which the program exists should be examined in
enough detail, so that its likely influences on the program can be identified.
A3 Described Purposes and Procedures The purposes and procedures of the evaluation
should be monitored and described in enough detail, so that they can be identified
and assessed.
developed and then implemented so that they will assure that the interpretation
developed and then implemented so that they will assure that the information
corrected.
effectively answered.
A11 Impartial Reporting Reporting procedures should guard against distortion caused
by personal feelings and biases of any party to the evaluation, so that evaluation
evaluated against these and other pertinent standards, so that its conduct is
Schedule
What schedule will be (was) followed (each part attached to particular questions,
collection procedures, and analysis activities) and how did it compare to what was
planned (when the study is complete)? Use a Gantt Chart or something similar to
plot out when particular activities will be (were) conducted so pre-requisite
activities are complete in time for subsequent activities. In the report, compare
proposed to actual schedule followed.
Budget
What budget will be (was) followed (each part attached to particular questions,
collection procedures, and analysis activities) and how did they compare to what
was planned (when the study is complete)? Clarify for each question what the
budget will be (was) and how it compared to the actual expenditures of time and
money (even if no actual funds were spent).
Overall Critique
Strengths
Weaknesses
References
Title xviii
Appendix A